Surphaser Scanners

Omega · Newbie Joined: Jun 12, 2007 Posts: 5

Hey,

I'm just getting into 3d scanning and all I've had experience with is the Surphaser scanners. Our Hemispherical scanner has been giving me problems as in bad scan data. I was just curious if anyone else using these scanners has had any trouble with them or maybe just an overall opinion on Surphaser in general. Any info would be great!! Very Happy

ScanMan · Newbie Joined: Aug 14, 2006 Posts: 10

Hi,

We used their latest scanner (HS25X) on a project recently and were fairly impressed with the results.

I have some associates that use these scanners for offshore work in the far east and other plant work in Europe and swear by them, one of the comments I get a lot from these guys is that the point cloud is always of very good quality.

I have not had any direct dealings with Surphaser as they use a distributor here in the UK.

What are you scanning? Have you spoken to Surphaser about your problems? What exactly is wrong with the data and have they given you a good reason for the poor quality?

PS. Welcome to the world of 3D scanning!

Omega · Newbie Joined: Jun 12, 2007 Posts: 5

Hi!

I was scanning like clothes and man-sized equipment with their hemispherical scanner. What's going on with the data is I set it's parameters for the sweep, mainly in front of it from a 35 to -35 left and right, the high/low varied from scan to scan. What was happening is I'd be getting black images back from my scans, when I processed them it was shooting off far from my target sweep, like at the ceiling, floor, or behind it rather than in front of it.We got in contact with their tech support quite a bit, sent in log files and the actual data. They never experienced something like this before so we had to send in the scanner so they could play with it, they're thinking it might be a calibration problem so thats what we're hoping that's all it is. Thank you very much for the warm welcome! I'm really excited and loving my beginning in 3D scanning, just need to get past the technical bugs Very Happy

Joe · Newbie Joined: Mar 19, 2007 Posts: 3

Hi I've just come across the Surfaser SX25, we've had a play with the FARO LS system before and always found the accurracy to be too poor. Should I beleive that the Surphaser is accurate as it says? (ie 0.2mm)
Thanks Joe

Amok · Newbie Joined: Jun 23, 2007 Posts: 6

I made a list with 3d scanners here.
http://www.3dlaserscanning.org/postt561.html
You should check it and see if you find other options, depending on what you need.

faraz · Newbie Joined: Aug 22, 2007 Posts: 3 Location: London, UK

Never believe a scanner is accurate as the manufacturer says!

These are usually *ideal* conditions at optimal distance and illumination and may also refer to results using multiple averaged shots to improve the LMS accuracy - you may not have these ideal conditions in your environment and may not have time to do multiple scans / shots so the accuracy you get in your data may not be that quoted by the manufacturer.

You also have to figure in registration accuracy which in most cases is probably more important than the difference between say 3mm or 6mm scan accuracy.
_________________
Faraz Ravi
Pointools | High Performance Point Cloud Software
www.pointools.com

pburrows145 · Newbie Joined: Jan 11, 2007 Posts: 4

MD3D act as a reseller for Surphaser in the UK and the results shown on the web-site look pretty good for Heritage based applications. As Faraz mentions there are lots of key considerations when assessing the accuracy of any given scanner - erroneous data-points (in certain conditions) are a common occurence across most models I would say.

Anyway - good luck sorting it all out.

Regards
_________________
Kind Regards
Paul Burrows

RUBMEJB · Newbie Joined: Jun 05, 2008 Posts: 2

The Surphaser is the next generation of a scanner design formerly known as 3Dguru, manufactured by Visi Image. I have much experience with phase-based systems and can say that the Surphasers are capable of generating the highest quality data of any system I've used, including phase-based systems from Leica, Faro and Callidus.

The problem with Surphaser scanners is workflow and inconsistency. The software interface called SurphExpress is unstable and does not offer registration functionality. You must collect the scan and then apply a variety of filters during post processing to generate a file format you can import into another application for registration (this means 5 minutes to collect the scan, an extra 2-3 minutes to view it in 2D, then 10-15 minutes to apply filters and export into PTX, PTS, PTX, etc). Further, the filters are inconstent and the product documentation offers little explanation on what each filter actually does. The basics related to distance and gaps (edge detection) are self explanatory, but there are many other filters that must be applied to optimize the data set and it can get confusing pretty quickly.

The system takes time to master, and the workflow is horrendous. But if you have the time to spend with this system the benefits can be significant. Also, I know that the manufacturer has now signed an OEM deal with Trimble, so many of these issues may be remedied in the near future. But for the moment, it's not a practical system to remain in our arsenal. We use HDS4500, HDS6000, and Scan Station 2 systems, utilizing both Cyclone and LFM.

Omega · Newbie Joined: Jun 12, 2007 Posts: 5

Thanks for the info! Have they come out with any updates for the SurphExpress software?

RUBMEJB · Newbie Joined: Jun 05, 2008 Posts: 2

Not that I'm aware of. Although the manufacturer has recently entered into an OEM agreement with Trimble, so it is likely that the interface is being revamped to include a more stable platform and registration functionality. I hope so!